Replies

From the Link Posted:

WED 03/09/2005
Mexico cheers U.S. decision on Texas inmates

WASHINGTON - Mexico welcomed the Bush administration's decision to allow Mexican citizens on Texas' death row to have their sentences reviewed. The reception in the president's home state, in contrast, was varied. The development came in the Supreme Court case of Jose Medellin, one of five alleged gang members sentenced to die for the Houston killing of Jennifer Ertman and Elizabeth Peña in 1993. Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott said the Bush administration's decision intruded on the state's legal authority. But he did not immediately decide whether to appeal.

U.S. Sen. John Cornyn, a Republican and frequent Bush backer, said last week that "Texas is simply trying to enforce its laws; Medellin has been given access to an attorney, a right to a fair trial, and all of the appeals and habeas corpus rights our system affords." But on Tuesday the senator had no quarrel with the Bush decision, because the American president, not the international court, was passing judgment, Cornyn spokesman Don Stewart said Tuesday. The administration's call for new hearings in state or federal courts, depending on where the cases were originally tried, goes forward unless Texas decides to contest the order in court.

Richard Stoll, a Rice University political science professor, said Bush's decision showed a proper willingness to buck Texas Republicans now that he has broader responsibilities. "There is a certain amount of irony in the president siding against Texas in this case, but when he changed jobs he changed his perspective." he said.

Mexican officials cheered.

"It is very important that the Mexican government express its satisfaction and its recognition of this determination by the United States' executive power, which without a doubt will have an important effect on the cases of our compatriots," said Arturo Dager, legal representative to Mexico's foreign ministry."

THU 03/03/2005

Perry wants cases reviewed

"In the wake of Tuesday's ruling, Gov. Rick Perry has directed the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles to review the 28 cases and recommend appropriate action. It is likely that many will receive life sentences, requiring that they serve 40 years in prison before becoming eligible for consideration for parole."..

Thu 06/29/2006

" High court axes foreigners' plea / Denial of suspects' claims of consular rights violations could affect Texas case

In a ruling that could have implications for a Houston death row case, the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled against foreign suspects who want to suppress statements they gave to police during interrogations when they were not informed of their right to contact consulate officials from their home countries. The court ruled 6-3 that Mexican Moises Sanchez-Llamas' and Honduran Mario Bustillo's rights under the Vienna Convention were not violated because the treaty's consulate-notification provision does not apply to searches or interrogations.

Those cases originated in Oregon and Virginia, respectively. But the court's ruling could affect a Texas death-penalty case as well. Mexican national Jose Ernesto Medellin raised the same issue of Vienna Convention violations in his appeals. Medellin was one of six defendants convicted in the 1993 rape and murder of Jennifer Ertman, 14, and Elizabeth Peña, 16, in a northwest Houston park. "The court could have used Jose's case a long time ago to hand down the same ruling they handed down today," Medellin's attorney, Michael B. Charlton, said from his office in El Prado, N.M. "That pretty much ends Vienna Convention claims on confession claims but not on the other issues," he added. Medellin's case is under review by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals after President Bush's edict last year for courts in Texas and other states to review his and 50 others involving foreign nationals who raised consular violation claims. But the court's decision does not relate to Bush's order.

In the majority opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts specified that Article 36 of the Vienna Convention "secures only a right of foreign nationals to have their consulate "informed" of their arrest or detention - not to have their consulate intervene, or to have law enforcement authorities cease their investigation pending any such notice or intervention." Under the convention, ratified by the United States in 1969, when a national of one country is detained by authorities in another country, authorities must notify the consular offices of the foreigner's home country when requested. Roberts also wrote that a detained foreign national, "like everyone else in our country, enjoys under our system the protections of the Due Process Clause." He set aside, however, the matter of whether police must advise defendants of their legal options. Roberts was careful to stipulate that the ruling "in no way disparages the importance of the Vienna Convention."

In a dissenting opinion, Justice Stephen Breyer wrote that the decision runs afoul of the treaty's interpretation "not only with the treaty's language and history, but also with the (International Court of Justice's) interpretation of the same treaty provision." Justices John Paul Stevens and David Souter joined in the dissent. Breyer wrote that the ruling may weaken respect abroad for the rights of foreign nationals and diminishes the treaty's proviso that foreign nationals are deserving of fair treatment throughout the world. A spokesman for the Texas Attorney General's Office, which is handling the Court of Criminal Appeals case involving Medellin, declined to comment about the potential impact of the court's ruling."....